tv Public Affairs CSPAN February 24, 2013 4:00pm-6:00pm EST
a lawyer to call when you quickly. we are now at 4:00. do not leave because i need your vote on the three things. we will go to governor >> in oklahoma, we have been focusing on transparency. we have done a lot of things all the governors have talked about. we have focused on being able to let any ineffective teachers go if they are not meeting the standards, certainly focusing on complete college america, art career tech systems -- our career tech systems.
our colleges of education, making sure they are raising the bar on the quality of teachers they are turning out from our teaching schools. making sure that an education degree is not the degree of last resort, the degree of people who are highly qualified going into the profess and be our best teachers once they enter our schools. he -- profession being our best teachers once they enter our schools. >> when you go back to your states, the question i ask in local districts -- in every low performing district in connecticut, there is at least one outstanding school. what you need to do is ask why that school is not being replicated as opposed to the non-successes being replicated. if you can get people outside that box and have that discussion, then you are going to make even more improvement. with the audience and governments join me in thanking
our panelists? two quick things, reference has been made will be gone. we're about to visit the lake here very shortly. that is, and standards. if you are not up on this, go back and get an understanding of what it is about to happen. in many of the states, your parents are about to find out in the next 18 months to two years that despite what they have been told by their superintendencts, their children are not doing as well as they think they are. this is going to cause another crisis in education and united states. i am concerned that it is going to cause a crisis in education
to my colleagues, who are the governors of the states. having announced that an warned you all that you need to get up on common core and what testing around common core is going to mean to you, i have a suggestion. and that is that the n.g.a. hunt institute has been moved out of turn line of this year and place in little later in the year, june 10 or 12th in chicago, illinois. governor quinn has agreed to host this event. the specific subject matter of this event is on common core implementation, and what that means for each of the governors. i urge you to find a way to participate. i have been lucky enough to have participated in the last two symposiums. we talked about common core. a lot of what i know about it, i have learned there. my fear is that many folks are
not on it. we're going to be talking about successful implementation for common core state standards and sharing lessons learned from the race to the top and how they can be applied to common core implementation. i urge you to attend. before we adjourn, we must finalize action on committee policies. earlier this year, our staff worked to review and update nga policies. the staff advisory committee has recommended action in front of us all. this has been vetted with all of the staffs of the members of the state of the governors who are members of the committee. i think it has been well-known and well covered. i do not think there is a reason to discuss it unless someone has an objection. . i think emotion has been made. and seconded -- a motion estimate. and seconded. all in favor say aye? >> aye. >> adjourned, all in favor say
>> we're opening the phone lines now. you can let us know what you think that what you heard from the governors during their meeting. the numbers to call her on your screen. you can also let us know what you think using twitter. if you called us in the past 30 days, give others a chance to weigh in. the governors have talked about education, cybersecurity, and employment for people with disabilities. our first caller is jane, on the line from columbus. what did you think about what you heard? >> i liked what i heard. i am not a fan of public unions
in the first place, to be honest. i feel at the teachers unions are having too much pull in the whole discussion. i understand they want to protect themselves and their collective bargaining rights, but i think a lot of the time the kids get lost in the shuffle. last year we had the teachers strike in chicago. i felt like there should never be a point when the kids are not in school, where teachers are not teaching. i like what the governor from oklahoma said, that she said we need to make sure the teachers coming out of our universities are better teachers. better teachers, not necessarily more teachers. i think that is important to understand. my dad does a lot of work and chicago. he does work in public schools there. sometimes there are two or three teachers working there that can barely form a sentence in english.
these people are teaching children. it is important to just make sure that we are putting out good teachers as opposed to more teachers. and just to make sure that we keep in mind when we dealing with the that kids are the most important thing. >> thanks. we're going to go to sherman oaks. >> pivoting off of what werner abercrombie said -- governor abercrombie said about the use of technology in the classroom, i'm a supporter of that. i'm also still a supporter of the use of print materials. it is a complement to the digital text, but not in the form of heavy, expensive textbooks that cannot be revised for years in a row. i have wondered for years, and have been advocating for years
-- why are textbooks not published in the form of magazines, which would be cheaper, lighter, also could be given to kids to keep and become part of the beginning of their own personal print library, instead of being turned back to be stored at the end of the school year? they could be annotated in britain and as the student -- and written in as the students choose, and therefore personalized. they could be always up-to-date in all topics and subjects, and could be as colorful and engaging as magazines, many of which are published weekly and the rest are published monthly. it would be a great advance in the printed text part of education. host: what do you do? guest: i call myself a social inventor. globalideasbank.org.
it unfortunately has not been maintained in recent years. it was the first online crowd sourcing of creative ideas on world wide web, starting in 1995. host: thanks for the ideas. we have a call on the line for independence. guest: i wanted to say, i appreciate everything i heard. it was informative to me. -- caller: i wanted to say, i appreciate everything i heard. it was informative to me. two speakers had so much information to pass on, i thought it was very informative, and just how much research has been going on i was being received. as one governors said, so informative, so much information in such a concise
amount of time. i was hard-pressed to gather as much as i could. i wanted to say thank you very much for that. host: thank you, matthew. you can listen into the segments from the national governors association online anytime. we will also be showing them later on in c-span in our programming. we're going to move on now. a caller on the democratic line. caller: thank you very much. this was very informative. i would like to know if we can get has here -- hess here to present some information. when you talk about usually done and can do, and the diversity of these individuals. diversified thinking, i am not talking about individuals were just gone through the system.
i'm from corporate america. i served on a public school board for the last 14 years. what dr. hess was saying was that these individuals that come through the system don't understand the business from the outside. they don't really do a good job. a school system is a business. toledo has 4000 employees at 24,000 students, which are basically who we serve. if we don't do the right thing for them, because they don't understand customer service, and we are putting the best people in the best places -- oftentimes, we promote from within. as dr. hess has said, individuals do not have the diversity to understand what it takes to be successful. how do we go about doing that?
you have all the individuals coming back from the military. not necessarily captains of lieutenants, but they can do something in the system. one of the things that public education is missing so much now appears to be men. 85% of the teachers in the school system are females. dr. has had said -- hess had said, the single female heads of household, the ability for these young kids to have men in their lives to help them understand the importance of critical thinking would be very beneficial to those individuals that have that leadership skill. host: thanks, larry. we have heard a lot about education and veterans during the nga meeting. also an article from the "associated press," saying the
governors are joining the white house to fight those cuts. governors from both parties warning of a damaging economic impact of sequestration. martin o'malley said the sequester is, "senseless, and does not need to happen." brian sandoval said, i have not given up hope, but we're going to to be prepared for whatever comes. both of those governors led one of the nga discussions yesterday. you can watch that online, as we turn now to elizabeth on the democrats line. caller: i was greatly impressed with dr. hess's presentation, and governor macconnell from virginia, and governor abercrombie.
in governor macconnell's presentation, but he was very masterful and quick in his list of remedies, as far as various things. and how well they work. with governor abercrombie, i was greatly impressed with his handling of the labor union problem. one thing that bothered me, i forget which governor as the question about competition -- asked the question about competition. nobody ever mentioned the word voucher is being a possibility -- as being a possibility of handling competition. it seemed to have worked quite well in washington, dc before it was ended. host: thanks, elizabeth.
some of the staff is still wrapping things up at the governors association. that is happening here in washington, dc. we will bring you some more tomorrow as well. taking down some of the tables here and getting ready for some of the discussion tomorrow. kelly calling from houston, missouri. caller: i am a teacher. i really wish we would address on the national level teacher salaries. been brought up over and over again. it is extremely difficult as a teacher to make it. i theoretically make $40,000, but really, truly when it comes down to it, i only bring home about 2/3 of that. we need to do something to increase teacher salary. it teacher makes a huge difference in the classroom.
a good teacher can use these technological tools they are talking about. we need to address that. if we are federalizing everything else, why are we not thinking about federalizing our teacher salaries? host: thanks, kelly. i call on our line for independents. camille? caller: hi. i wanted to say that all the governors, keep up the good work. keep striving to find solutions to address these issues in today's economy. i am concerned about our teacher salaries as well. i would like for the government to present a possible solution
to this situation, because i think teachers are underpaid and overworked. that is a concern of mine. i would like to see [indiscernible]up there. i would like to see smaller classes so that kids have the quality of the teacher attention. that is about it. everything else will take time. but keep up the good work. keep working together in unity to find solutions for the states and communities, for the people of united states of
america. host: we are going to end on that note. thanks for all your calls today. if you did not get a chance to weigh in, go online and visit cspan's facebook page. we will open the phones again tomorrow morning on "washington journal." we will hear from michigan governor rick snyder and how the economy and immigration and gun policy affect his state. we will also take a look at the sequester, with tom shoup. he is editor-in-chief of "government executive." google also hear from marcus weisgerber -- we will also hear from marcus weisgerber. also tomorrow, the nga will wrap up its meeting with a discussion on government's role in health issues. we will hear from dr. oz. that is 9:00 a.m. on c-span2. >> it is pretty accurate that they do not play by the rules in most cases. they bend the rules to fit their
circumstance. i think americans and all of westerners tend to be a lot more legalistic. we want things on a contract. once we see things are written down, we think that is the be- all and end-all. the chinese will find any contract -- sign any contract, then they will try to figure out a way to interpret it to get around this requirement. >> where does that come from? >> it is a relentless drive to get ahead. it is what has built the place over the last 30 years. this relentless drive to get ahead, they see some of the constructors that we put on them in terms of trade -- constrictors that would put on them in terms of trade as, we're trying to hold china down. now that we've got to the top, were trying to hamstring the more tied them up with a not of rules -- them or tie them up with a not of rules -- knot of rules.
>> tonight at eight o'clock on c-span's q&a. >> next, secretary of state john kerry delivers his first speech about challenges in us foreign policy. the calls on congress to avoid the automatic spending cuts that could jeopardize more than $2 billion in foreign aid, security assistance, and international programs. this is just under an hour. [applause] >> thank you very much. thank you so much. hello, uva. it is great to be back on the grounds. i want to say to president sullivan what a treat it is to be here with you. thank you for hosting this great occasion. to my friend robert hurt, served with him in state government and now we travel to washington together. i look forward to good work
together, especially if on this occasion to introduce secretary kerry and to introduce uva to the secretary. as i walked onto the stage i had a memory. on this stage with my dear friend, uva board member alan -- in a debate for lieutenant governor, a primary debate for lieutenant governor in the february of 2001. the first debate i've ever been in as -- >> [inaudible] [laughter] >> so good to have you here, alan.this is a wonderful occasion. the founder of the university being the first secretary of state. so good to have the first secretary of state being the founder here, the cornerstone was laid by not only in thomas
jefferson but james monroe, another secretary of state. it is fitting that the secretary would be here. we know john kerry's track record. decorated veteran in vietnam, prosecutor, started in local government, as do so many others who serve. the state government in massachusetts. nearly 30 years as a u.s. senator. the only committee that he served on from the day he became a senator, until its last day in the center of the foreign relations committee.-- until his last day in tas s as senator ine foreign relations committee. he grew up with a father in the foreign service. it is a family calling. i will count it as a joy but as a bittersweet sadness that my service in the senate, i got to serve with him on the foreign relations committee for one week. [laughter] i am the junior senator on that committee. i sit far out on the wing on that committee.i was together
with this chair for one week. it was the first committee vote i cast was to confirm him as the new secretary. senator, you are coming to a place that believes deeply in the values that you share, as robert mentioned. president jefferson strongly believed in the connection of this wonderful exemplary nations to a world community. we have been a global leader. i always like to think about the global leadership that tries to balance military strength. secretary kerry knows the importance and limits of that spirit diplomatic strength, the -- military strength, diplomatic strength, the strength of our economy, the strength of our moral example, after balance those things. this university has been educating and training people to understand that balance since its very beginning. i spoke this morning with a whole group of very talented young rotc students, many who are getting ready to graduate in
commission on the three programs operating on this campus. the university has put 1079 people into the peace corps in its 51 year history. numerous people over the course of the university history have gone to work in the state department's. then we can go broader, teach for america, or the students who have trained over generations to get jag program degrees, military law degrees here. this university is so committed to that global role that we are supposed to play as citizens and to keeping those balances of strength and balance. there's really no one today on this stage in our country where exemplifies keeping those invalid better than our speaker. -- better keeping those in balance better than our speaker. we're so glad to welcome here to the ground and to the commonwealth. please give a warm welcome to
secretary john kerry. [applause] >> thank you very much. thank you. good morning. thank you for an extraordinarily warm welcome, charlotte. i'm honored to be here. senator tim kaine, thank you for generous words of introduction. tim has only been on the foreign relations committee for total of a few weeks now. based on his testimony a moment ago, i can commend him on his voting record. [laughter] he has found himself new job security, because in virginia
you have a single term governor for a full your years. he has traded one single four- year term for a six-year term with potential extension. [laughter] given the fact i traded several extensions for an four-year term and then i'm finished, maybe he knows something i ought to be listening to that i could learn a thing or two. we did not overlap long, but i want to tell everybody we know each other pretty well from service as lieutenant governor and when he was governor of the state. lieutenant governor in my state, so we have that in common, and before being senators. a quick story, i don't know what you do in virginia as lieutenant governor, but massachusetts, once upon a time, calvin coolidge was lieutenant governor. he was at a dinner party and
they asked him what you do, he said i'm calvin coolidge, lieutenant governor. he said, tell me all about the job. he said, i just did. [laughter] it's a huge admiration for the path tim kaine has followed. i know his sense of what america means to the world that was forged in the early days that the congressman hurt referred to about his catholic missionary work in honduras, just helping other people to live healthier lives. two weeks after the election, tim called and asked if he could serve on the senate foreign relations committee. you don't always get those calls in the senate. people stepping forward to volunteer in that way on the
committee, it does not have an opportunity to bring bacon back home.and perhaps deliver as easy a re-election. so i know that in tim kaine, virginia has a senator who is going to make his mark on that committee and is going to make a mark for your common wealth and our country. and we're grateful for your service, tim. thank you very much. [applause] also, i am particularly grateful for congressman robert hurt being here today. i have left partisan politics. it's wonderful for me to be able to welcome people in the complete spirit of non partisanship, not just bipartisanship. i'm confident you are going to make your contribution.
thank you for your presence here today. [applause] president sullivan, thank you so much for welcoming me here today to this historic, remarkable campus. i feasted on the view as i walked across the lawn with president sullivan. i have to say, you all are very lucky to go to school here. it is an honor to join you hear on the grounds. [laughter] [applause] this very beautiful monument to the potential of the human mind. i have to tell you, to stand here beneath the gaze of the sages of athens, those thinkers who gave us the idea of
democracy, which we obviously still continued to perfect, not only in our nation but around the world, we are grateful for that. also, i was here a long time ago as an undergraduate. i played lacrosse on that field over there against you guys. my first act of diplomacy is literally to forget who won. i have no idea. [laughter] i want to thank the folks in uniform. i want to thank the rotc and all those of you who have served and will continue to serve in some way for our nation. there's no greater declaration of citizenship than that.i believe citizen is one of the most important words in the american lexicon. some might ask why i am standing here at the university of virginia, why i'm starting here
as secretary of state making his first speech in the united states. you might ask, doesn't diplomacy happen over there, overseas, far beyond the boundaries of our backyard? why is it i'm on the foot of the blue ridge instead of the shores of the black sea? why i am here instead of in kabul? the reason is simple. i came here purposely to underscore that in today's global world there is no longer anything foreign about foreign policy. more than ever before, the decisions that we make from the safety of our shores don't just ripple outwards, but they also create a current right here in america. how we conduct our foreign policy matters more than ever before to our everyday lives, to the opportunities of all the students i met standing outside,
would every year they are here, -- whatever year they are here, thinking about the future. it is important not just in terms of the correct that we face but the products that we buy, the good that we sell, and the opportunities that we provide for economic growth and vitality. it's not just about whether we will be compelled to send our troops to another battle, but whether we will be able to send our graduates into a thriving workforce. that's what i am here today. i'm here because our lives as americans are more intertwined than ever before with the lives of people in parts of the world that we may have never visited. and the global challenge is of diplomacy, development, economic security, environmental security, you will feel our success or failure just as strongly as those people in those other countries that you will never meet.
for all we have gained in the 21st century, we lost the luxury of just looking inward. instead we look out and receive -- we see a new field of competitors. i think it gives us much reason to hope, but it also gives us many more rivals determined to create jobs and opportunities for their own people, a veracious marketplace that's sometimes forgets morality and values. i know that some of you and many across the country which that-- wish that globalization would just go away. or you remember easier times. my friend, no politician, no matter how powerful, can put the genie back in the bottle. our challenge is to obtain the-- tame the worst impulses of globalization
even as we harness its ability to spread information and possibility, to offer even the most remote place on earth the same choices that have made us strong and free. before i leave this weekend to listen to our allies and partners next week throughout europe and the middle east and in the coming months across asia, africa, and the americas, i wanted to first talk with you about the challenge that we face here at home, because our engagements with the rest of the world begins by making some important choices together, and particularly about our nation's budget. our sense of shared responsibility that we care about something bigger than ourselves is absolutely central to the spirit of this school. it's also central to the spirit of our nation.
as you well know and dr. sullivan reminded you a moment ago, our first secretary of state founded this great university. students in his day could basically only study law or medicine or religion. that was about all. thomas jefferson had a vision. he believed the american people needed a public place to learn the diversity of disciplines, studies of science and flora, fauna, philosophy. he built this university in the image of 20 called the-- what he called, the illimitable freedom of the human mind. today those of you will study here and teach here along with the taxpayers contributors, and parents who believe in your potential, you are all investing in mr. jefferson's vision. think for a moment about what that means. why do you spend many days and
the dollars it takes to earn an education here or anywhere? why did jefferson what this institution to remain public and accessible, not just to virginians but as a destination from everywhere? i know that he was not thinking just about your getting a degree and a job. it was about something more. jefferson believed we could not be a strong country without investing in the kind of education that empowers us to be good citizens. that is why founding this university is among the few accomplishments that jefferson listed on his epitaph that he wrote for himself. to him, this place and its goal was a bigger part of his legacy ban serving as secretary of-- than serving as secretary of state or even as president, neither of which made the cut. just as jefferson understood, that we need to invest in education in order to produce
good citizens, i join president obama today in asserting with urgency that our citizenry deserves a strong foreign policy to protect our interests in the world. a wise investment in foreign policy can yield for a nation the same return that education does for its students. no investment that we may that-- make that is as small as this investment put forward such a sizable benefit for ourselves and for our fellow citizens of the world. that's why i wanted to have this conversation with you today, which i hope is a conversation that extends well beyond the borders of charlottesville, will be on this university, to all americans. when i talk about a small investment in foreign policy in the united states, i
mean it. not so long ago, someone told the american people and asked how big is our international affairs budget? most said 25% of our national budget. they thought it ought to be pared back to 10% of our national budget. let me tell you, i would take 10% in a heartbeat, folks. because 10% is exactly 10 times greater than what we do invest in our efforts to protect america around the world.our old foreign policy budget is over 1% funds all our civilian and foreign affairs efforts. every embassy, every program that saves a child from dirty drinking water or aids or reaches out to build a village to bring american values. we're not talking about pennies on the dollar.we are talking
about one penny plusa a bit on a single dollar. where do you think this idea comes from that 25% we spend? it's pretty simple. as a recovery politician,-- recovering politician, nothing gets a crowd faster in a lot of places than saying i am going to washington to get them to stop spending all that money over there. sometimes they get a lot more.-- more specific. if you're looking for an applause line, that's about as guaranteed as you can get.but guess what? it does nothing to guarantee our security. it does not guarantee a stronger country. it does not guarantee a sounder economy or a more stable job market. it does not guarantee that the best interests of our nation are being served. it does not guarantee that another young american man or woman will not going to lose their life, because we were not willing to make the right
investments here in the first place. we need to say no to the politics of a lowest common denominator and of simplistic slogans and start making real choices that protect the interests of our country. that is imperative. [applause] unfortunately, the state department does not have our own grover norquist pushing a pledge to protect it. we don't have millions of aarp seniors who send in their dues and rallied to protect american investments overseas. the kids whose lives we are helping save from aids, the women we are helping to free from sex trafficking, the students who for the first time
can choose to walk into a school instead of into it a short life with terrorism, their strongest lobbyists are the rare committed americans stand up for them and the resources we need to help them. i hope that includes all of you here and many listening. you understand why every time a tough fiscal choices loom, the easiest place to point fingers is foreign aid. as ronald reagan said, foreign aid suppers for the lack of-- suffers from a lack of domestic constituency. that's part of the reason everyone thinks it costs a lot more than it really does. so we need to change that. i reject the excuse that americans just are not interested in what's happening outside their immediate field of vision. i don't believe that about anyone of you sitting here and i don't believe that about americans. the real domestic constituency
for what we do, if people could see the dots connected and understand what we are doing, is really large. is a 314 million americans whose lives are better every day because of and when they have-- what theywe do, and deep down wn they have time to stop and pick about it, deep down they know our-- think about it, deep down they know our investment abroad actually makes them and our nation safer. my friends, in this age when a shrinking world clashes with calls for shrinking budgets, we are not alone. it's our job to connect those dots, stocks, to connect them for the american people between what we do over their hands the size of the difference it makes. over here makes won't why the price of abandoning our global efforts would be exorbitant and why the vacuum we will leave by retreating within ourselves will quickly be filled by those whose interests differ dramatically from ours.
we learned that lesson in the deserts of mali recently, in the mountains of a pakistan in 2001, -- afghanistan in 2001, and in the tribal areas of pakistan even today. today's first years at uva we are starting the second grade when a small group of terrorists around the world and shattered our sense of security and our stability, are skylines. so i know that you certainly have always understood that bad things happening over there and threatened us right here. knowing that, the question is this -- how do we together make clear that the opposite is just as true, that if we do the right things, the good things, the smart things over there, it will strengthen us here at home. let me tell you my answer. i believe we do this in two ways.
first, it's about telling the story of how we stand up for american jobs to businesses.- and businesses. pretty practical, straightforward, pretty real on a day-to-day basis. second, it's about how we stand up for our american values, something that has always distinguished america. i agree with president obama that there is nothing in this current budget fight that requires us to make bad decisions, that forces us to retrench or to retreat. this is a time to continue to engage, for the sake of the safety and economic health of our country. this is not optional. it is a necessity. the american people understand this, i believe it. our businesses understand this. it is simple. the more they sell abroad, the more they will hire here and don't.-- at home.
since 95% of the world's customers live outside our country, we cannot hamstring our own ability to compete in those increasingly growing markets. virginia understands this as well as any state in the union. senator tim kaine took trips to make this happen as governor. international trade supports more than 1 million jobs here in virginia. more than one out of five jobs in virginia, which actually today is the story of america. there's a company near dulles airport, with the the help of the persistent advocates of our embassy in bangkok, it beats out the french and russian competitors to build the newest broadcast satellite for thailand. virginia's orbital is now teaming up with a california company called spacex operation -- space exploration
technologies that makes satellite equipment. that's a deal that our embassy helped to secure valued at $160 million goes right back into american communities from coast to coast. that is the difference that our embassies abroad can make here and all. -- at home. these success stories happen in partnership with countries all over the world because of the resources that we have deployed to bring business and jobs back to america. these investments, my friends, are paying for themselves. we create more than 5000 jobs for every billion dollars of goods and services that we export. so the last thing that we should do is surrender this kind of leverage. these successes are happening in canada, where state department officers there got a local automotive firm to invest tens of millions of dollars in michigan, where the american auto industry is now making a remarkable comeback. in indonesia, thanks do with the
-- thanks to embassy jakarta, that nations privately owned airline does place an order for commercial aircraft, the largest boeing has ever been asked to fill. the indonesian state railroad is buying its locomotives from general electric. >> more than 600 u.s. companies -- in south africa -- are doing business in south africa and where opec and the trade and development agency just opened an office to help close more investment deals between american companies and africa's booming energy and transportation sectors.it is also a two-way street. a major south african energy company plans to build a multimillion-dollar plant in louisiana that would put more americans to work. let me tell you, this is happening.
in cameroon and in bosnia and in other surprising places. in the shadows of world war ii, if you told someone that japan and germany would today be our fourth and its largest trading -- and fifth largest tadinrading partners, someone would have thought you were crazy. before nixon's old opening with china, no one could imagine that today it would be our second- largest trading partner, but that is exactly what has happened. 11 of our top 16 trading partners used to be the beneficiaries of u.s. foreign assistance. that's because our goal is not to keep a nation dependent on us forever. it is precisely to create these markets, to open these opportunities, to establish rule of law. our goal is to use assistance and development to help nations realize their own potential, develop their own ability to govern, and accomplish our economic partners. -- become our
economic partners. one of america's most incredible realities continues to be that we are a country without any permanent enemies. take vietnam. i will never forget standing next to john mccain in the east room of the white house. each of us on either side of president clinton as he announced the once unthinkable normalization of our relations with vietnam, and efforts that john mccain and i worked on for about 10 years to try do. in the last decade, thanks in large part to the work of usaid, our exports to vietnam increased by more than 700%. every one of those percentage points our jobs here in america. -- are jobs here in america. in the last two decades, 1000 vietnamese students and scholars have studied spanish and taught have studied and taught in
america through the fulbright program, including the foreign minister, who i just talked to the other day and who has feelings about america because of that engagement. the list goes on. as the emerging middle class in india, the world's largest democracy, buys our products, that means jobs and incomes for our own middle-class. as our traditional assistance to brazil and decreases, trade there is increasing. brazil is one of the new tigers moving at a double-digit pace. it supports additional jobs here at home, many in the u.s. travel and tourism industry. when jefferson expanded our consular posts, precisely to promote trade, he never could have could the importance today. -- could have imagined the importance today. nor could be a predictable--
predicted the number of americans abroad that we help with passports, visas, with other problems that arise, or that will offer to those who want to grow their families to adoption or who find themselves in legal trouble or distressed far from home, or the role our diplomats play screening potential security threats and taking them off the radar screen before they ever reach your consciousness potential in the worst ways, or that we create a new american jobs for every 65 visitors that we help bring to our shores. so we have to keep going. we cannot afford the kind of delay and disruption that stance on the horizon in washington. the exciting new trade negotiation that president obama announced last week between the united states and the european union will create the world's biggest bilateral deal with it comes to fruition, a trans- atlantic partnership that will match the scope and ambition of our trans-pacific partnership talks.
but our work is far from over. seven of the 10 fastest-growing countries are on the african continent. and china understanding that, is already investing more than we do there. four of the five biggest oil and gas natural discoveries happened off the coast of mozambique last year. developing economies are the epicenters of brokers and their -- growth, and they are open for business. and the united states needs to be at that table it. if we want a new list of assistance graduates, countries that used to receive aid from us, we cannot shy away from telling this story to the american people, to your members of congress, and to the world. let me emphasize, jobs and trade
are not the whole story and nor should they be. the good work of the state department and usaid is measured not only in the value of the dollar, it's also measured in our deepest values. we got your security and-- value stability and security in other parts of the world, knowing that failed states are among our greatest security perhaps and the new partners are our greatest assets. the investments that we make support our efforts to counter terrorism and violent extremism wherever it flourishes. we will continue to help countries provide their own security, use diplomacy when possible, and support those allies and take the fight to terrorists. remember, i cannot emphasize this enough, i'm looking at a soldier in front of me with a ribbon on his chest, deploying
diplomats today is much cheaper than deploying troops tomorrow. [applause] we need to remember that. [applause] as senator lindsey graham said, it's national security that we are buying. it sounds expensive, but it's not. the state department's conflict stabilization budget is about $60 million a year now. that's how much the movie "the avengers" took in on a single sunday last may. [laughter] the difference is the folks we have on the ground doing his job
are real super heroes. -- this job are real super heroes. we value human rights and we need to tell the story of america's good work there too. we know that the most effective way to promote the universal rights of all people, their rights and religious freedom is not from the podium or from either end of pennsylvania avenue. it is from the front lines, where ever freedom and basic human dignity are denied. that's what tim kaine understood when he went to honduras. the brave employees of state and usaid and diplomatic security personnel who protect civilians serving as overseas work in some of the most dangerous places on earth and they do it is fully cognizant that we share stronger partnerships with countries that share our commitment to democratic values and human rights.they fight corruption in nigeria.
they support the rule of law in burma. they support democratic institutions in kurdistan and in georgia, mindful from our own experience that it takes a long time to get democracy right and that it rarely happens right away. in the end, all of those efforts, all that danger and risk that they take makes us more secure and we do value democracy just as you demonstrated here at uva through the presidential program that's training leaders in the emerging democracies. thanks to a decade of intensive diplomatic efforts alongside our partners, a conflict that took more than 2 million lives. the book about the holocaust, 6 -- when people think about the holocaust, 6 million over the course of world war ii. we lost 2 million people in the longest war in africa in our time in the last years. and south sudan was born out of that act as a free nation. securing its future and peace
for all of its citizens will take continued diplomatic efforts alongside partners like the african union. we can develop the capacity of the african union, the less the u.s. will have to worry. i've stood in south sudan.i'v see seen those challenges firsthand. they still face the world's newest country and its government. those challenges threaten to reverse hard-won progress and stability. that's why we are working closely with that nation to help it provide its own citizens with essential services like water and health and education and agriculture practices. we value health and nutrition and the principle of helping people gain strength to help themselves the cornerstone-- through coerrnerstone initiatives like feed the future. we help countries not only to plant and harvest better food but we also help them break the cycle of poverty, of poor nutrition, of hunger.
we seek to reduce maternal mortality, eradicate polio, and protect people from malaria, tuberculosis, and pandemic influenza. i will tell you probably that-- proudly that the global milk initiatives and programs i was proud to have an aunt in helping to create like pepfar, we have saved the lives of 5 million people in africa through the efforts of americans. [applause] today, astonishingly, we are standing on the edge of the potential of an aids-free generation, because we know these diseases don't discriminate by nationality. and we believe that relieving
preventable suffering does not need justification. i think that part of our values. we valued gender equality. knowing that countries are more peaceful and prosperous when women and girls are afforded full rights and equal opportunity. [applause] in the last decade, the proportion of african women enrolled in higher education went from nearly zero to 20%. in 2002, there were fewer than 1 million boys in afghan schools and barely any girls. now with america's health, more than one-third of the almost 8 million students going to school in afghanistan are girls. and more than one-quarter of their representatives in
parliament are women. we should be proud of that, and it helps make a difference in the long haul. the fulbright program enables talented citizens to share their devotion to diplomacy and to teach their belief that all the earth's sons and daughters are to have the opportunity to lift themselves up. today these exchanges bring hundreds of thousands of students to america from other countries and vice versa. in the last year alone, more
than attend thousand citizens of foreign countries participated in the state department both academic youth professional and cultural exchange programs right here in virginia. virginians also studied abroad through state department programs. senator fulbright, i had a privilege of testifying as a young veteran from vietnam. he knew the value of sharing our proudest values made a difference in the long run. he said having people understood your thoughts is much greater security than to have been suffering. our assistance is not a giveaway. it is not charity. it is an investment in a strong america and in the free world. foreign assistance lips other people abandon reinforces their willingness to link arms with us in common. when we help others crackdown on corruption, it makes easier for our own compliance against corruption and it makes it easier for our companies to do business. we build partnerships that mean we don't have to fight nuclear battles alone.
it means working with our partners around the world and making sure iran never obtained a weapon that could endanger our allies or our interests. when we help others create the space they need to build stability in their own communities, we are helping brave people build a better more democratic future and making sure that we don't pay more later in american blood and treasure. the stories that we need to tell of standing up for american jobs and businesses and standing up for our american values intersects powerfully to in the opportunity that we have now in this moment of urgency to lead on the climate concerns that we share with our global neighbors. we as a nation must have the foresight and courage to make the investments necessary to safeguard the most sacred trust we keep for our children and our grandchildren.
and that is an environment not ravaged by rising seas, deadly superstorms, devastating droughts, and the other hallmarks of a dramatically changing climate. president obama is committed to moving forward on that and so am i. so must you be ready to join us in that effort. [applause] can we all say thank you to our signers? [applause] so, think about all these things i've listed. think about the world as you see it today. let's face it, we're all in this one together. no nation can stand alone. we share nothing so completely as our planet.
when we work with others to develop and deploy clean technologies that will power a new world -- six trillion dollar market waiting -- huge amount of jobs, when we do that, we know we are helping create new markets and opportunities for america's second to none innovators and entrepreneurs so that we can succeed in the next great revolution in our marketplace. we need to commit ourselves to doing the smart thing and the right thing and to truly take on this challenge. if we don't rise to meet it, then rising temperatures and rising the levels will surely lead to rising costs down the road. ask any insurance company in america. if we waste this opportunity,
it may be the only thing our generations are remembered for. we need to find the courage to leave a far different legacy. we cannot talk about the unprecedented changes happening on our planet without also talked about the unprecedented changes in its population. another great opportunity at our fingertips. in countries across north africa and the middle east, the majority of people are younger than 30 years old. 60% under 30. 50% under 21. 40% under 18. half of the total under 20. they look for the same opportunities and the same things that you do -- opportunity. we have an interest in helping these young people, to develop the skills they need to defeat mass unemployment that is overwhelming their societies, so they can start contributing to their communities and rebuild their broken economies rather than engaging in some other terrorist caught or other kind of extremist activity. for the first time in human activity, young people around the world act as a global
colewort, including many of the -- cohort including many of the people in this room. we are more open-minded, more proficient with the technology that keep them connected as no generation in history has ever been before. we need to help all of them and us to use this remarkable network in a positive way. some may say not now, not while. we have while. -- not while we have our budget. it's too expensive. believe me, my friends, these challenges will not get easier with time. these challenges will not get easier with time. there is no pause button on the future.
we cannot choose when we would like to stop and restart our global responsibility or simply wait until the calendar says it is more convenient. it is not easy. but responding is the american thing to do. i will tell you, it is worth it. these programs the vance peace and security around the world, which help -- advance peace and security around the world, which open markets to american manufacturers, fostering stable societies to save lives by fighting disease and hunger, defended the universal rights of all people, advance freedom and dignity, bringing people together, nations together. addressing problems that transcend the separation of motions, giving hope to a new generation in an interactive
world of citizens. in all those things it costs us as scientists mentioned about one penny of every dollar that we invest. america, you will not find a better deal anywhere. i am particularly aware that in many ways the greatest challenge to america's foreign policy today is in the hands of our diplomats and policy makers in congress. it is often said we cannot be strong at home if we are not strong in the world. but in these days of the budget sequester, which everyone wants to avoid -- or most -- we cannot be strong in the world unless we are strong at home. my credibility as a diplomat,
working to help other countries create order is strongest when america at last put its own fiscal house in order. that has to be now. [applause] think about it. it is hard to tell the leadership of other countries that they have to resolve their economic issues when we do not resolve our own. responsiblea agreement. let's not use this opportunity because of politics. as i have said many times before, america is not exceptional simply because we say we are. we are exceptional because we do exceptional things.
both where there are problems as well as where there is promise. both where there is danger as well as red there is democracy. i am optimistic that we will continue to do these exceptional things. i know that is who we are and it is who we have always been. as we ask for our next steps in this path, we would do well to learn a lesson from our own history. in the aftermath of world war ii, america had a choice, just like we do today, to turn inward. instead the secretary of state, george marshall, sought in both defeated and allied countries the threat of bankruptcy, homes and re -- homes and railways destroyed, economies decimated. he had the foresight to know that there could be no political stability, no peace without renewed economic strength. he knew that we had an
obligation to partner with europe, help them rebuild, modernize, give the push that it needed to become the powerful and peaceful trading partner it is today. after the war, my friends, we did not spike the football, we created another level playing field. we are stronger for it today. when i was 12 years old i had the privilege of living in germany, where my father, an officer, was called to duty. one day i visited the eastern side of berlin. the part that had not received any of the help from the united states and its courageous marshall plan. the difference was undeniable, even to my 12-year-old eyes. there were few people on the streets, a few smiles on the faces of those were there. i saw the difference between hope, the spare, freedom, and oppression. people who were given the chance to do something as opposed to the people who were not. as western europe regained its
vibrant color, the place i visited was still in black and white. when i went back to west berlin, two things happened. first, i was summarily grounded for venturing without permission to the other side of the city. [laughter] second, i started to pay special attention to the plaques on the buildings that recommend -- that recognize the united states of america for lending a hand in rebuilding. i was proud. the marshall plan, imf, and other organizations led by the united states are evidence of our ability to make the right decisions at the right time, taking risks today in the interest of tomorrow. we now face a similar crossroads. we can be complacent or competitive as markets bloom in every corner of the world. with or without us. we could be there to help plant
the seeds or we can see the power to others. given the chance to lead a second great american century, we must not just look to the american landscape today. look at the days to come. we must marshal the courage that define the the marshall plan so that we might secure in the future freedom. let's remember the principles of jefferson's time. looking to independence echoing in our time. america's national interest is in leading strongly and it still in doers in this world. let me leave you with a thought. when tragedy and terror visit
our neighbors, whether by the hand of man or the hand of god, many nations give of themselves to help. only one is expected to. with the leadership of president obama i will work hard to secure for the congress the continuing of the lead of the separation. not because we view it as a burden, but because we know it to be a privilege. that is what is special about the united states of america. that is what the special about being an american. that exceptional quality that we share is what i will take with me on my travels on your behalf. the responsibility cannot be reserved for responses to emergencies at home. it has to be exercised in the pursuit of exercising the
disaster, of building markets. of standing up for our guidance. over the next four years i asked you to stand with our president and our country to continue to conduct ourselves with the understanding that what happens over there matters right here. and it matters that we get this right. thank you. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> he will be visiting countries in europe. in britain, germany, france, and and italy. turkey, egypt, saudi arabia, the united arab emirates and qatar. >> we know foreign companies and countries swipe our secrets and now they are taking the ability to separate talks are part grid, financial institutions, air- traffic control systems. we cannot look back years from now and wonder why we did nothing in the face of real
threats to our security and economy. >> year a lot of concerns. interestingly enough, one and the concerns we hear and see this reflected in these time limits. great, you have shared information about stuff that happened three months ago, but what about now? but one reason why we're trying to increase our timeliness so we get out ahead of the issues and we make progress in that space. i think over the last year in particular that we have really improved our ability to share information and faster with the private sector. i also hear concerns from different sectors about ensuring that the other sectors that they rely arm also are increasing their cybersecurity. if you are a bank, you rely on power, water, transportation to conduct business. what i frequently hear is that all the companies want to make sure that all the critical
infrastructure sectors are working together because everything is so interdependent. >> . cybersecurity executive order, monday night on "the communicator's" on c-span2. next, former congresswoman helen -- ellen tauscher on nuclear weapons reductions and the possibility of a new arms control treaty. from a conference on nuclear weapons, this is about 40 minutes. >> welcome to the fifth annual nuclear deterrent summit. i am the president of the publication form. before we proceed, i would like to recognize a few of our partners this morning, cb & i and techsource.
we appreciate partnering with industry to bring this summit together. use of the headline in "usa today" about massive cuts in the navy and army, i guess. those cuts will not happen until after march 1st and everyone is saying -- well, not everyone, but a lot of people are saying it's not going happen. this is a crazy time being in government, watching government, in the public policy arena for 30 years, i find it totally debilitating and frustrating to watch what's happening, and ensure you do also.
a lot of you, most of you, your revenue was going to depend on what happens in the next few weeks. and what happened was nuclear weapons is going to be critically important and how people view it. this is what it's all about in dealing with our nuclear deterrent capability. for opening speaker, we have the hon. ellen tauscher. she came up to me and said this morning, this is not your fifth. she was one of our first speaker is when we started this series and it originated in albuquerque, new mexico. it was called the international nuclear policy forum. we predated the nnsa. we're very happy to have, probably for the half dozen's time a real public service and
to all of us in this country, the hon. ellen tauscher. [applause] >> good morning. thank you. it's a very special honor to be here as a guest of em monitor and publications. it's been about a dozen years since i have been involved in one way or another. i have been very lucky in my life. i am now a quadruple threat. i am a former, former, former, a former. former undersecretary, former member of congress, former chairman of the subcommittee and a former special envoy for strategic stability missile defense. that allows me to tell you that i'm out of government and for
those of you that i have worked with over the last 16 years he is known reasons i was a small child, so he is laughing, but those of you have worked with all these years, let me thank you personally for your patriotic service and for all of your hard work and to remind you that i'm not speaking as someone in the government, because i'm not. if i'm speaking as anyone, and speaking as myself. now that i'm out, the vice chair on the atlantic council, so if there's anyone to blame, blame them, but they're actually a fabulous organization, so there's no one to blame. because i'm out of government, i get to say what i believe and what i think is important to say. i could be a little provoking, but let me just say that my purpose today is not to rehash
some talking points that have been cleared by everyone, which was one of my former lives, but to put forward some of my own thoughts and opinions that i hope my friend the discussion of nuclear deterrence over the next few days before the conference. over the last few years, i've gotten into the habit of reminding that you would all be called my base. i did represent livermore when i was in congress, so those of you who have ever lived there, you literally were my base. i have some former constituents here. but because we all know too much about politics these days from the 24-7 nattering pundit class, a base is the people who are most important or most knowledgeable about a subject or a person. when it comes to everything and
anything nuclear, you are the base. you are the people who know more and care more about it. and so, i think it's important that today, i hope we can work with you and i can remind you how important it is for you to be active and for us to find a way to create a call for action on how to make sure that this interest group interested about national security, interest about nuclear weapons, the deterrent of nonproliferation, people, quality, that we all work together to augment the political capital and to and form and influence the american people about the choices that will be coming, whether we want them to or not and how we can move the needle on political policy over the next four years of this administration. i guess the question is obvious.
where are we on nuclear deterrence? i think we think we have moved things pretty far. in many ways, things have changed. unfortunately, in many ways, they have stayed the same period just over 12, 13, 15 years ago, there was no nnsa. programs were fairly new. stewardship was a fairly near term. there was one thing we replaced with rrr and we have done a lot to reassure everyone that we do not need to test. as much as things have changed, some things have not. one of the biggest changes is that no one considers that we had any kind of real threat of a great power war any longer. that causes some people to
question the value of a nuclear deterrent. certainly, people who are my daughters aged, 21, they question the need for nuclear weapons. they do not understand the history. because they are active of voters, we need to make sure they understand the value that nuclear weapons still played in our overall national security strategy, the way they underpin major alliances, and the way that we work multilaterally and bilaterally in a number of different arenas. important that we consider the nuclear weapons complex in its totality because we can represented that way. it's also important to remember that very few americans think of it that way. very few americans understand the number of people that work
in the labs, work throughout the complex, the kind of science that has been developed their and all of the many, many different innovations that have been accrued to the american people because of the science developed there. despite all these realities of all the good that has been done, and because we still have to wait too many weapons -- way too many, the debate about the management of our stockpile is still one that is contentious. as i said, we created the nnsa in 1999 and we have had a lot of accomplishments. we had a very successful convention in 2010 and. i was there for 10 days as a
hostage. we got the new start treaty negotiated and ratified. we have not been able to ratify the ctbt causing a great consternation real-world. getting 67 votes is very difficult. i can understand why the administration is really concerned about whether it has the political capital right now to make that offer. i know that secretary kerry would like to think we can get one of , and as we look at the 2015 convention and, we have to have a pretty good excuse for the world community as to why we have not moved forward. that lack of action has but the entire world community and to a very untenable place waiting for the united states to agree to
agree to our own stated national policies. while countries like north korea and iran further destabilize without any direct and serious consequences because it is not in force. i would also say, regardless and regarding the size and structure of the stockpile that the united states is still tied up in an old lot of bilateral-only due to the lack of bipartisan consensus here at home. united states and russia accounts for the vast majority of the world's nuclear weapons with roughly 15,000 total warheads in the strategic-non- strategic basket. bilateral relations between the united states and russia are not what they have been in the most recent past.
neither the united states nor russia faces issues were it requires them to be armed to the teeth were the effectiveness of each country's stock pile was proved to be prohibitively expensive. perhaps in past times, when the united states and russia targeted each other, the investment in maintaining the effectiveness of the stockpile was easily justified. discussion on the resize and content of the arsenal has been traditionally thought of in terms of threats, the size of the competing arsenal, geopolitical tensions, nato alliance security, etc. historically come a little consideration was given to funding the stockpile complex as there were general bipartisan and bicameral agreement in the intrinsic value of the nuclear arsenal strategically and as a deterrent.
now, however, in the third decade after the end of the cold war with the now eliminated soviet union, i would suggest that it's past time to look at the size and structure of the arsenal in line with other macro strategic budgetary and political realities. if you listen to the commentators on cnbc when the market is opened, you can really swear that our adversaries are more likely to be the credibility of the united states's power more by the size of our debt than by the size of our nuclear arsenal. apparently, the sequestration, which was meant to be so horrible that any and all measures would be taken to avoid it arrives next week. if sequestration goes ahead, and i think it will come of the united states will need to cut
$50 billion a loan from the defense department programs my october and roughly $500 million -- will need to cut $50 billion alone. it is not like in nuclear proliferation has disappeared as a threat. nuclear material and proliferation bad boys continue to cause alarm real-world. north korea refuses the demands to disarm. to the contrary, the nuclear tests shows that half style regimes maintain dangerous and unrecorded nuclear ambitions despite our best effort to dissuade them. iran continues to advance their nuclear enrichment program in the defiance of united nations with a wide array of country is that are maintaining punishing economic sanctions against the regime and there proxy's. pakistan is enlarging their
nuclear arsenal faster than any country in the world, a chilling prospect that raises worries of future nuclear terrorism. all along the time, the simpson center argues maintenance of the strategic nuclear arsenal alone will cost between $352-$392 billion over the next decade. you do the math. we need to think not just about the safety, security, and effectiveness of the stockpile in maintaining the investments of a safe and science-based infrastructure and attracting the best in human capital, but we also need to consider the stock pile and complex affordability in the overall requirement to shrink the
federal budget. now, let me remind you that i am and remain one of the staunchest supporters of the nuclear weapons complex, class, people come and the mission. i have fought and will continue to fight for all the united states needs to maintain their nuclear security access, both human and kinetic. until such a time it is appropriate to move multi- laterally towards a nuclear 0. as you know, the president says that will take patience and persistence and it may not happen in his lifetime, and he's a lot younger than i am. i think that we have to keep in mind that we should not commit to an arsenal and a complex that congress is not willing to fund
in a predictable and consistent way. maintaining a safe and secure deterrent requires consistent, steady funding from the congress, even in an austere environment. yet, the members of congress to take a truly significant interest in nuclear weapons continues to dwindle. for most members, there is no base constituency. most members are stretched thin to represent over 730,000 people. for those with a nuclear complex facilities, they need to be supported. they number less than a couple dozen and that is counting on the senator's. hardly a short march to the 218 votes needed in the house or 60 votes needed regularly in the senate.
again and, it is for those in the nuclear community to build, support, and shape the debate on the need for serious funding to maintain a robust arsenal and make the appropriate modernizations and steady investments in leading-edge technology and innovative science to ensure an effective arsenal without resorting to testing. the american public will not make these demands without a huge public campaign. we cannot afford it, and frankly we don't have the time. president obama has done his part in every one of his budget submissions to the congress. president obama has kept his promise to increase the size of the nnsa budget, but as we all know, the president can only request funds. only the congress can authorize and appropriate. speaking of president obama, let me say that in him, the american people have a president who is
truly engaged on the importance of our nuclear posture for international security. as we heard in the state of the union address, president obama continues to make nuclear security and progress towards his agenda in a priority, but the domestic agenda in his second term will be jam packed. his political capital is already stretched thin. does that mean that we accept that other national priorities may crowd out the attention for modernization, infrastructure investments, and other things important to the complex? i hope not. with a crowded presidential agenda, and the nuclear defense and national security force in this room and our friends, we will need to go on the offensive to help shape the debate rather
than assume the president alone can or will expend political capital necessary to move our agenda forward. what are some ideas for going forward beyond the new start now that i don't have to be the one to implement the plan? let me say the new start treaty is a success, but it has its limitations. i believe we have more strategic deployed weapons than we need on both sides and that the new star does not address, as you know, nonstrategic and non deploy strategic weapons. president obama should seek additional reductions to shrink the size of our arsenal. i believe we should aim for the floor of 1000 strategic deployed weapons with a limit of 2500 total for each side including strategic and non-strategic, deployed, not deployed. in an agreement on bilateral reductions, we can most likely
require a renewed emphasis on reaching an agreement between russia and nato with the united states on the european missile defense. russia's requirement for a legally binding limit on this approach is not possible or necessary. russia should look to join the europe's defensive shield against bad actors outside of europe now as a way to promote the stability and share the burden for common european security. i call that moving from mutually assured destruction to mutually assured stability. what would the new start look like? what we call it? newest start? next start? first, and most obviously, it would reduce the overall number of nuclear weapons in the world between the two largest holders
of nuclear arsenals. second, it would show progress toward article 6 of the nonproliferation treaty ahead of the 2015, and thereby increase our influence in holding people like iran to account for their threats to the viability. third, open the possibility of bringing in other countries into the nuclear reduction dialogue. if we make enough cuts to the united states and russian arsenals, we can influence others to join in a multi- lateral reductions. four-by cutting the number of weapons in the arsenal and getting rid of these weapons as best we can, we reduced the amount of funding needed long- term for modernization. that does not mean we still do not need a lot of money. we need a lot of money. we need a lot of money to make sure that the complex is second
to none. we need a second to none arsenal supported by a second to none complex that is modernized with infrastructure -- with a second to none infrastructure and a second to none human capital base of a continued to lead the world in the best times. i am saying gwine about getting back to the negotiating table with russians in that it may take some time. i don't expect much movement this year, nor do i expect an agreement may be made until after 2014. i think any process in reductions, whether done bilaterally or unilaterally only to consider the situation in iran and whether the iranians have begun to a knowledge their international obligations to satisfactorily answered the nature and extent of their nuclear program, or not.
the last piece of the agenda that needs political capital fund-raising is getting the ctbt ratified. the president has made it clear that ratification is important to him and his administration, but they need help raising political capital and voter awareness in order to achieve the herculean task of getting the votes in the senate. we currently do not have that political capital. we should just printed like everyone else in washington does. it would be up to us and all those great arms control groups out there that those of us with the best interests of the american people and a commitment to a strong nuclear security to help the president influence and educate the american voters on the importance of ratifying. by letting the american people know that we haven't living under the strictures since
1993, but because we have now ratified treaty, it is not enforced, we had achieved one of the benefits of the treaty. all we need are 67 votes to but the treaty into force and nothing in our current policy will change. it seems pretty easy. here we are in 2013, and i am a quadruple threat former. i'm happy in the private sector, better known as the real world. i just cannot let go of these issues. i joined a group called business executives for national security in 1993 because i had moved to california in 1989 and lived right near the livermore lab. i wanted to know more about it. this is way before i ran for congress. i think we are enormously blessed to have a president who cares about the future of our
nuclear weapons, nonproliferation, and terrance. it is our job in the nuclear community to augment the president's political capital and an sure we can take the difficult steps on the road to prod by toctbt and reach bilateral talks with russia and also asking our elected members of congress to fully fund a safe, secure, and effective, and affordable, united states nuclear arsenal. thank you very much for listening today and i understand that if any of you have an easy question, i can try to answer it. thank you. [applause] >> questions from you folks? question there? please identify yourself. >> thank you.
you talked about sequestration, which everyone assumes is likely to hit. if you have to prioritize where you would cut, where you would spend money, where would you invest, where would you do so going forward with sequestration imminent? >> bayh was still in congress, i think it would be advocating for a deal in the next five or six days. there are so many horrible ramifications for sequestration. not only in our image around the world but also the confidence of the markets that we can actually do what we are supposed to. it's just a terrible situation. the idea that federal employees could be furloughed is crazy. likeu're in a situation this and the worst thing happens, i would suggest that
they do not have the time or temperament to prioritize because everyone has their pet rock. i would suggest that they do everything they can to back a load the biggest parts of the cuts, basically look to the back end and try to trim as best they can across the board. i think that's the only fair thing they can do. obviously, that's impossible. there are some things that are federal. i don't think we're going to be letting people out of those faa towers and saying, sorry, put everybody on half staff and only fly from 7:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m. some decisions are going have to be made on how to make sure that the things that we have to have come up paying their soldiers, making sure that families of the deployed are taken care of,
obviously the veterans, there are just so many different things. by the time you get to 50 or 20, pretty soon, you are making priorities. this thing is to avoid this, we all know what the deal looks like. the numbers have been out there for weeks. it's the political will to do it and i hope my former colleagues can get together and do it. >> we have a question up front. can you hold up your hand so we can get you a microphone? >> greg miller. could you unpack your thoughts about the timetable, what you feel as a likely timetable for possible reductions of the type you would like and why you say will probably not be until 2014?
can you unpack your thinking there? i would be very interested. >> when i left as undersecretary, i stayed on as the special envoy until august, partially to manage the way through the election, the russian election, and the russians have made it clear publicly and privately that they are not interested in sitting down for reductions. we began a conversation about a bigger macro topic on mutually assured stability of including many different issues including missile defense, cyber, tactical weapons, other things that are part of the agenda. we need some confidence building. obviously, things have not remained as warm and cooperative as they were during the previous russian administration. i think everyone is hopeful.
we certainly want to get back to the table with a bigger agenda. right now, i do not see that there's a lot of activity on the russian side to do that. the russians work closely with us on iran and a number of other issues, so it's not like we are not talking. we do not have an active negotiation. that rose will get through her hearings soon and get confirmed. she is an indefatigable negotiator and will do a terrific job. we need to have a partner. i also think that it will take some time, depending on the type of agreement that we have. behalf to be mindful that if something has to be ratified, i do not think anything can be ratified in this environment. 2014 is kind of the hurdle, the speed bump, to get over.
betemit this part of an over arcing conversation about missile defense. i still think that there is a way to get it done that maintains our prerogatives and all of our security choices while at the same time brings russia into european security in a way that benefits everyone. it moves us forward into a more cooperative agreement. >> hello. you mentioned certain numbers in your presentation. they sound like the numbers that might come out of the fabled 490-day study. are we eventually going to see the result of that study any time soon? does what you said it applied to future start treaties dealing
with non deployed forces? >> great question. i don't know what's in the study in a longer period i was part of a long, long time ago. these are just my opinions of what i think the numbers may be. i'm glad you asked the question because i want to make a very important point. believes that we need a stronger complex as the numbers go down. we need to continue to have tremendous investments in infrastructure to get the best science, engineering, technology, high performance computing, all the important things that the complex needs that is more important the day after we have reductions than the day before. the smaller the weapons complex, the more important it is we get it right.
i have been someone who is advocating and getting rid of these, so did speak. you get rid of the hedge weapons and have to be sure that what you have is when you have. i'm confident that it is. i think we can advocate that the smaller number of weapons that we need even more math, science, technology through the complex and we need a strong nnsa than we have ever needed before because of what has happened 25, 30, 40, 50 years ago. when we made those investments 60, 70 years ago, this is what we got. we've got to make those again because the american people need those innovations.
they need the innovations that come out of the weapons, taught -- weapons context. we have to be diligent, decisive, committed about these investments. not what we have been which has just been a little bit everywhere and frankly fighting against water projects. 535 members are ready to say they have groundwater waste in their plants district. that is not a fight i want to be in anymore. there's a lot about this we have to get better and i believe we can. part of it is knowing what we are for and we have to be for the excellence we have always had in a complex for thousands of people in making those investments more predictable and
keeping them a steady stream so it can accrue those benefits for the american people. >> last question from the back. >> tony from northrop grumman. you mentioned the 1000 might be an appropriate number of weapons. how do you decide what the right number of weapons is? at what point do we risk going low enough where people become peers with the united states? >> it still is a consideration. that would be part of what i assume the 490-day study looks out. the context of the stockpile is threat-based. it is about how you articulate and characterize the terms. you have to constantly calibrated for the time because it means different things for different people.
it is also making sure that we have a safe, secure, and reliable, and effective, stockpile. there cannot be surprises and there cannot be a lack of performance. wherever that calibration is, that's the number. it is well within 1000 and you can find your place depending on the threat. one caveat i put out there is i do not think anything will happen. north korea has fallen out of bed and iran is provocative. it's too risky. it sends the wrong message. i think these are pieces that lots of people are working on those problems and they have been so far difficult to resolve. should they get resolved, i think we then have to understand that there will be many people
looking directly at us for savings and we have to have an answer for them. the answer cannot be we are only happy having so many weapons. i would rather make my own choices about why the size should be 1000 or 1500 than have someone else tell me it's going to be 750. as i said, let me say a stronger. you cannot have a president put a budget before the congress and say this is what i need to have a safe, secure, reliable, effective stockpile and then have the congress say, i'm going to give you that minus x. how is that right? that's not right. we're going have to find a way to square the circle. part of it is education. part of it is standing up for
ourselves and making it clear. part of it is being innovative so someone else is not deciding to buy our lunch for us. we buy our own that way we get to order what we want and make sure we get fed. >> thank you. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> tomorrow, in a bet with former investor thomas pickering on iran's nuclear capabilities and possible diplomatic solution is live at 2:30 p.m. eastern on c-span3. we have more from the national governors association tomorrow as they close their winter meeting with the conversation with dr. oz on healthy eating. that is live on c-span2.
>> i think it's pretty accurate and that they do not play by the rules. they banned the rules to fit their circumstance. i think -- they bend teh rules. we are more legalistic. we want things in a contract. we think that is the be all and all. the chinese will sign or agree to any trade agreement and then the minute the ink is dry they will try to figure out a way to interpret it around the requirements. >> where does that comes from? >> a relentless drive to get ahead. this booming economy, this relentless drive to get ahead, get better, improve. this to the strictures report arm them in terms of trade and agreements, they see not from their perspective and trying to hold china down. we operated without rules for years and now that we are at the top, we're trying tost